Arizona public school districts' dollars spent in the classroom. In November 2000, voters approved Proposition 301, which increased the State’s sales tax from 5 percent to 5.6 percent to provide additional money for educational programs. The enabling legislation for Proposition 301 requires the Auditor General to “. . . monitor school districts to determine the percentage of every dollar spent in the classroom by a school district.” This report presents our analysis of the percentage of dollars spent in the classroom for the most recently completed school year.

Arizona Revised Statute § 43-1089.01 provides a non-refundable individual tax credit for fees and cash contributions paid to public schools in Arizona for the support of extracurricular activities or character education programs. This credit is available only to individuals. The credit is equal to the amount of fees paid or amount contributed up to $200 for single or heads of household taxpayers and up to $400 for married taxpayers that file a joint return.

In fiscal year 2011, Chino Valley Unified School District’s student achievement was similar to peer district and state averages, and its operational efficiencies were mixed with some costs higher and some costs lower than peer districts’ averages. The District’s per-pupil administrative costs were slightly higher than peer districts’ because the District employed more administrative positions per pupil. The District’s plant operations, food service, and transportation programs operated reasonably efficiently, with cost measures such as cost per square foot, cost per meal, and cost per mile that were similar to or lower than peer districts’ averages. However, the District needs to improve controls over access to critical information systems and strengthen controls over its fuel purchase cards.

In fiscal year 2012, Duncan Unified School District’s student achievement was similar to peer districts’, and the District operated efficiently overall. Although the District’s administrative costs per pupil were slightly higher than the peer districts’ average, the District has taken steps to reduce its costs by reducing its number of administrative positions. The District’s plant operations, food service, and transportation programs were efficient with lower costs per square foot, per meal, and per mile, respectively, than peer districts’ averages. However, the District needs to improve its purchasing and computer controls. The District also needs to accurately determine, and report to the Arizona Department of Education, its ridership information to help ensure the District is properly funded and to allow it the ability to calculate and monitor transportation performance measures such as cost per rider and bus capacity utilization. Further, the District should ensure that its inmate worker documentation complies with statute.

In fiscal year 2012, Fowler Elementary School District’s student achievement was slightly higher than the peer districts’ averages, and the District operated efficiently. The District’s administrative cost per pupil was similar to the peer districts’ average, and it employed proper accounting and computer controls. The District’s plant operations costs per pupil and per square foot were lower than the peer districts’ averages primarily because of lower energy costs. Additionally, the District’s food service cost per meal was lower than the peer districts’ average, and the program was self-sufficient, in part, because the District paid the vendor that ran its program lower administrative and management fees than peer districts, on average. Further, the District’s transportation program was efficient, with lower costs per mile and per rider and efficient bus routes. However, the District did not accurately report its number of riders transported, which resulted in substantial overfunding for fiscal years 2011 through 2014.

In fiscal year 2012, Isaac Elementary School District’s student achievement was similar to peer district averages, and the District’s operational efficiencies were mixed, with much higher administrative and plant operations costs than peer districts’ averages but lower food service costs. Between fiscal years 2007 and 2012, the District decreased its classroom spending while it increased nonclassroom spending, primarily for administration and plant operations. At the end of fiscal year 2011, the District closed two schools to reduce costs, but its administrative and plant operations costs remained high, partly because of higher staffing levels. The District’s transportation program operated efficient bus routes but had much higher costs per mile and per rider than peer districts’, partly because it operated a smaller program but also because it offered more generous benefits. Finally, the District lacked adequate controls over user access to its computer network and systems.